Guest Sallaranda Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Ketchum can still release the paper even if it gets rejected along the peer review process. She might even be able to release it to a scientific journal, but that journal's reputation would immediately be squandered. If she wants the information out there, she will get it out there regardless of this peer review process. However, as far as including this species in the textbooks, the peer review process is essential. This is what I learned after talking to one of my profs over the phone today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 How would a scientific peer review look upon samples collected by lay people of varied backgrounds which were then submitted to the study? In some fields of study this happens all the time. We call it "citizen science", and it's the backbone of much that we've learned in ornithology, entomology, astronomy, geology, meteorology, etc. Standard vetting procedures certainly apply, but if your dog digs up a giant, human-looking femur that DNA analysis shows to occupy a unique place on the phylogenetic tree of hominids, I'd call that a bigfoot. If the DNA shows it to be Homo sapiens, then I'm not sure what the big deal would be about, science-wise. Of course, in this latter case, the bigger concern for the "collectors" would not be lack of respect from the scientific community, it would be the trouble they might get in from people who frown on the collecting of human remains . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LAL Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I saw a show on Amelia Earhart last night that pointed up one of the hazards of collection. The samples that might have had a bit of her DNA left were contaminated by the collector's DNA all over the outside of the collection bags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I thought that word was attributed to a statement of hers someone had posted in the giant Erickson thread as well. Short answer "no": I'm certainly not in touch with Ketchum personally, and I have no means to confirm that she has used that word. If she didn't claim that a report would be issued by the end of the year, it's still an odd statement for an author to predict the when of publication when the if is not yet established. I'm confused. What "author" are you referring too? My use of the word was meant in the generic layman's sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I'm confused. What "author" are you referring too? My use of the word was meant in the generic layman's sense. "author" = Ketchum. Whether or not she used the word "report", has she not made statements that her results will be published by the end of the year? (If not, then I apologize that I'm way more confused-ed than you are!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 Just a few grains of salt.... Last week I had a short email correspondence with someone who claims to have samples in the study. He stated the paper was being reviewed and that Ketchum was told July. He added that she has no control over when it would be out of review. We know Ketchum apparently posted on her Facebook page that "it won't be long now" and JC and others were hinting that the release was imminent. I wonder if the comment to the sas detective indicates they've hit a snag or if she just made a very general comment to play it safe (the paper could be released tomorrow and her statement would be absolutely true). To add to the wild speculation, didn't someone on the sd show say there's a rumor the EP was announcing something this week? Apologies if I heard that wrong - I'm away on a mobile device and can't confirm at the moment. I thought that was intriguing but no one seemed to pick up on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RioBravo Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 ...To add to the wild speculation, didn't someone on the sd show say there's a rumor the EP was announcing something this week? Apologies if I heard that wrong - I'm away on a mobile device and can't confirm at the moment. I thought that was intriguing but no one seemed to pick up on it. If there's any truth to this, he'd be better off waiting until the debt-ceiling debacle is out of the news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 If there's any truth to this, he'd be better off waiting until the debt-ceiling debacle is out of the news. Ditto, choose your moments for greatest impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 There are a couple of problems presented by the sample collection issue. Bear with me: Many of the samples submitted are undoubtedly from known domestic or wild animals. So much for those. What about the rest? From the very matter of fact statements made by Paulides and the relatiionship he has exhibited wirh Ketchum I assume that the balance of the samples are human (probably some are Native American) and that the claim will be made that these are Bigfoots. That may sound absurd. But are there any collection circumstances that might support that contention? Obviously there are. Here's one: I think it is a virtual certainty that Paulides and possibly others will bring forth "credible" individuals who will swear that they obtained their specimen (which showed human DNA), not from an unknown source, but from a Bigfoot. This kind of story will not cut it for any front line scientific journal, unless it is presented as a negative study. ps the hybrid rumor will prove to be false; if they had hybrid DNA it would already be shouted from the rooftops and every media outlet (not to mention the far fetched quality of this proposition). I don't think there is anyway to say that there is zero chance that some of the samples couldn't have had some transfer contamination. Though contamination would only go so far in explaining the results, and there are expected procedures involved to eliminate surface contamination on tissues. I understand that some amplification processes are so sensitive that breathing in the same room without a mask is a no-no. I'll say again here, if all there was is human DNA, Dr. K would not be doing this, period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 .... I'll say again here, if all there was is human DNA, Dr. K would not be doing this, period. Y You may be correct about that; I think maybe she didnt realize it was human in the beginning. That was what happened with the Snelgrove Lake DNA analysis by Kurt Nelson, an insect specialist. Well, it will unfold one way or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 "author" = Ketchum. Whether or not she used the word "report", has she not made statements that her results will be published by the end of the year? (If not, then I apologize that I'm way more confused-ed than you are!) I do believe that she told Steve that, yes. I think what we have here by Dr. Ketchum is an attempt to cool things down by pushing back expectations to the end of the year. Just a guess, but she's probably getting tired of the noise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slabdog Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I did a little digging on RB's blog and it appears that one of Tom Biscardi's associates is engaged to her daughter. I think that explains her interest in reinventing TB. Does Biscardi have it out for Ketchum? I haven't heard any stories or rumors along those lines. Just wondering if I missed some gossip? OOOOOOOhhhhhhh! Now I get it.....Biscardi's associate is engaged to the Bigfoot Field Reporter's Daughter... BFFR blog Not engaged to Dr. Ketchum's daughter.... whew! My apologies to the good Doctor for my previous rant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slabdog Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 When rwridley said he was reading that on RB's blog....I thought he actually was referring to the real "RB" (who I didn't think had a blog and it was driving me crazy trying to find it ) Apparently RB is rwridley's nickname for the Bigfoot Field Reporter... (ahem) any one have the address for DNA Diagnostic's lab....I think I need to send some flowers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted July 27, 2011 SSR Team Share Posted July 27, 2011 Ditto, choose your moments for greatest impact. That's why i'm pretty sure we're not goign to be far away now, now that the BFRO AP Show has finished & interest would probably be at an all time high.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted July 27, 2011 SSR Team Share Posted July 27, 2011 (edited) She's the one with the Ball Baby.. Just found this on FB.. Edited July 27, 2011 by BobbyO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts